Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:26563 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40689 of 2024 Applicant :- Dipesh Jaiswal Opposite Party :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mohit Singh,Saket Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Prashant Singh Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Mohit Singh, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Prashant Singh, the learned counsel representing first informant-opposite party-2. 2. Perused the record. 3. Applicant-Dipesh Jaiswal, who is a charge sheeted accused, has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following prayer:- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and to quash/set aside the entire proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No.249/2023 (State of U.P. vs. Dipesh Jaiswal & others) pending in the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Prayagraj under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 5/6 POCSO Act and also to quash the impugned charge sheet No. 131/2022 dated 09.10.2022 & the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 24.08.2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 127/2022, Police Station - Daraganj, District - Prayagraj. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may very kindly be pleased to stay the further proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No.249/2023 (State of U.P. vs. Dipesh Jaiswal & others) pending in the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Prayagraj under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 5/6 POCSO Act arising out of Case Crime No.127/2022, Police Station Daraganj, District Prayagraj during the pendency of the present Criminal Misc. Application (under Section 482 Cr.P.C.) before this Hon'ble Court and/or may pass such other and further orders which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, otherwise the Applicant will suffer an irreparable loss and injury." 4. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. submits that trial of applicant has already commenced before Court below inasmuch as, charges were framed against accused-applicant in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 228 Cr.P.C. by Court below. The framing of charge order was not challenged, resultantly the trial procedure commenced. On date, the prosecutrix has deposed before Court below as PW-1. Learned A.G.A. further contends that though this Court is a superior Court, dictates of prudence require that this Court should not evaluate the evidence, which has emerged on record as any such exercise undertaken by this Court shall amount to pre-empting the trial and may cause prejudice to the prosecution or the defence. On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. thus submits that the prayer prayed for by means of this application is misconceived at this stage. As such, the present application is liable to be dismissed. 5. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. He, however, submits that in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Criminal Appeal No. .... of 2024 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 12354 of 2024 (Mukesh and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others) decided on 09.12.2024 and Harish Dahiya @ Harish and Another Vs. State of Punjab, (2019) 18 SCC 69, the present application is liable to be allowed. 6. Sofaras the judgment of Apex Court in Mukesh and Others (Supra) is concerned, the same is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. In the aforesaid case, the writ petition was dismissed as having renderned infructuous upon submission of the charge sheet. In the opinion of Court, a writ petition challenging an FIR does not become infructuous upon submission of the charge sheet. Sofaras the judgment in the case of Harish Dahiya @ Harish and Another (Supra) is concerned, the same is also not applicable to the facts of case inasmuch as, the trial Court had referred to discharge the accused on the ground that a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the accused before the High Court has already been dismissed. 7. Having heard, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1, Mr. Prashant Singh, the learned counsel representing first informant-opposite party-2 and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the preliminary objections raised by the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel representing first informant-opposite party-2 in opposition to this application are clearly borne out from the record and furthermore the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record. In view of above, no good ground exists to entertain the present application. 8. As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed as having rendered infructuous. 9. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 24.2.2025 Vinay Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad